At this point I am no longer responding since it is pointless to argue with somebody who thinks it is okay to run unupdated unsupported apps in the internet age. You cant argue with stupid people like you.
Is it because I am stupid?
Or because you cannot support your claims? 
Hashtag, takin' the easy way out...
2 Likes
I supported my claims you just do not want to accept them since that conflicts with Linux does everything right views and does nothing wrong.
You supported that your data is on the dark web due to Ubuntu apps?
No, you did not.
We can all read and see that there is no presented evidence for these kinds of claims.
What this debate serves for readers is a much needed Critical Thinking Check.
In our current age; Security is used as a means for an end, not for the End User.
Take Age Verification for example.
By inciting fear over unsupported claims about Security, it is easier to obtain support to do... Something else.
By examining these claims critically, we can narrow down the real risks.
Protecting our freedom means that we accept that Free Open Source is a contribution effort. We cannot find a target to blame.
Nor can we accept sitting on idle hands.
4 Likes
I get it according to you Linux never does anything wrong and everybody should run unsupported obsolete applications. I guess I should reinstall Windows XP and use it on the internet as well since security risks are imaginary unless you can provide a current example of a breach according to you.
Let's avoid the insults (ad hominem) and the Logical fallacies. This evolved from debating the merit of ideas into personal attacks and accusations.
What was on the table is Gnome's control over GTK, applying LibAdwaita and the HIG by force. That Gnome has well documented history of shifting Bug Reports.
That a claim of data on the dark web due to Ubuntu Apps requires support.
That the general security assumptions proposed need support.
With support, these claims gain merit.
No one wants to read two people arguing and fighting.
These are real issues that GnuLinux users are trying to understand and a path of clarity is much more helpful.
1 Like
You are the one who decided to engage in the (ad hominem) insults and we are going to disagree since their are no Logical fallacies. Their is a path forward stop shipping non supported software and distribute directly from the developer via FlatPak or SNAPS.
I have proceeded to clean up the existing thread.
Now, to proceed with Moderating:
This is your ad hominem attack.
For it, your moderator warning to adhere to the forum Guidelines and focus on the Merit of the claims, not on personal attacks.
When you present a claim, the onus is on your to present the evidence for it.
Others can and should question claims and seek clarity.
Opinions can be strong, but defaulting to anger only disrupts debate and open communication.
7 Likes
I can't believe that someone thinks that Flatpaks and Snaps are the way forward. I have already posted elsewhere about an article warning against the use of such software packaging. They claim to be sandboxed but aren't fully sandboxed, but they do prevent access to the system.
I remember some time ago a forum member had installed a Flatpak version of Thunderbird but could not add attachments ... because it was running in isolation of the system.
Additionally they create bloatware, just like AppImages.
1 Like
Really? Show us one.
1 Like
Debate Drift: Testing ideas includes defending them from criticism. One side effect of defending an idea is that arguments can drift toward extremes. This is not necessarily because a person holds extreme ideas. It is because when defensive, a person seeks ways to push their idea when meeting resistance.
When Debate Drift occurs, you begin getting less accurate data.
This portion was set aside in order to get a thread back on track; restore focus. And to prevent micro-management and also to prevent idea oppression.
Disagreement does not equate to Right and Wrong.
The merit of presented evidence and ideas can give a clear picture, not our feelings about the ideas.
There is no need to continue this thread: closed.
For clarity:
I believe that this is the comment being referenced:
While not ad hom; it was a Smart Alec comment that I think created ire.
2 Likes